US7849438B1 - Enterprise software development process for outsourced developers - Google Patents
Enterprise software development process for outsourced developers Download PDFInfo
- Publication number
- US7849438B1 US7849438B1 US10/857,287 US85728704A US7849438B1 US 7849438 B1 US7849438 B1 US 7849438B1 US 85728704 A US85728704 A US 85728704A US 7849438 B1 US7849438 B1 US 7849438B1
- Authority
- US
- United States
- Prior art keywords
- enterprise
- application
- project
- business
- outsourced
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Expired - Fee Related, expires
Links
- 238000000034 method Methods 0.000 title claims abstract description 97
- 230000008569 process Effects 0.000 title claims abstract description 74
- 238000013461 design Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 87
- 238000011161 development Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 77
- 238000004519 manufacturing process Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 37
- 238000005516 engineering process Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 25
- 238000004883 computer application Methods 0.000 claims abstract description 4
- 238000012360 testing method Methods 0.000 claims description 148
- 230000010354 integration Effects 0.000 claims description 57
- 230000000694 effects Effects 0.000 claims description 45
- 238000013439 planning Methods 0.000 claims description 15
- 238000013507 mapping Methods 0.000 claims description 8
- 230000003993 interaction Effects 0.000 claims description 5
- 230000004044 response Effects 0.000 claims description 2
- 230000004931 aggregating effect Effects 0.000 claims 2
- 230000008520 organization Effects 0.000 abstract 1
- 238000012552 review Methods 0.000 description 27
- 238000007726 management method Methods 0.000 description 18
- 238000013459 approach Methods 0.000 description 17
- 238000012795 verification Methods 0.000 description 16
- 230000009471 action Effects 0.000 description 13
- 238000013508 migration Methods 0.000 description 10
- 230000005012 migration Effects 0.000 description 10
- 238000010586 diagram Methods 0.000 description 5
- 230000006870 function Effects 0.000 description 4
- 238000004458 analytical method Methods 0.000 description 3
- 230000008859 change Effects 0.000 description 3
- 238000012946 outsourcing Methods 0.000 description 3
- 238000012423 maintenance Methods 0.000 description 2
- 239000000047 product Substances 0.000 description 2
- 238000004513 sizing Methods 0.000 description 2
- 238000012549 training Methods 0.000 description 2
- 230000007704 transition Effects 0.000 description 2
- 238000010200 validation analysis Methods 0.000 description 2
- 108010046315 IDL Lipoproteins Proteins 0.000 description 1
- 230000008901 benefit Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000006227 byproduct Substances 0.000 description 1
- 238000004891 communication Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000001419 dependent effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000011156 evaluation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000006872 improvement Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000011056 performance test Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000012805 post-processing Methods 0.000 description 1
- 238000012913 prioritisation Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000008439 repair process Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000011160 research Methods 0.000 description 1
- 230000000717 retained effect Effects 0.000 description 1
- 239000011885 synergistic combination Substances 0.000 description 1
- 230000026676 system process Effects 0.000 description 1
- 238000012384 transportation and delivery Methods 0.000 description 1
Images
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06Q—INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY [ICT] SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES; SYSTEMS OR METHODS SPECIALLY ADAPTED FOR ADMINISTRATIVE, COMMERCIAL, FINANCIAL, MANAGERIAL OR SUPERVISORY PURPOSES, NOT OTHERWISE PROVIDED FOR
- G06Q10/00—Administration; Management
- G06Q10/06—Resources, workflows, human or project management; Enterprise or organisation planning; Enterprise or organisation modelling
Definitions
- the present invention relates to the use of consistent checkpoints in the process of enterprise-wide software development to allow significant events to occur in a predictable, scheduled manner. More specifically, methods are provided that ensure that the outsourcing of software development activities is done in a consistent, efficient, and secure manner and that the outsourced development projects meet an enterprise's standards for quality.
- the enterprise development process includes generating, by a business unit of an entity, a concept requiring a computer application, and verifying an integrated architecture blueprint, by an information technology unit of the entity, including a design for at least a portion of the application.
- the enterprise development process also includes developing, by outsourced developers of the entity, the application according to the integrated architecture blueprint, and integrating the application developed by the outsourced developers into a computing production environment of the entity by the information technology unit.
- a method for developing a response to a business need which has been initially documented as a concept and approved for additional development after an initial estimate includes capturing functional requirements to implement the defined concept through interaction with end-users of the potentially impacted business processes and, after completion of capturing the functional requirements, capturing system requirements for potential automation and software systems supporting the impacted business processes through interaction with systems development analysts for the potentially impacted automation and software systems supporting the impacted business processes.
- the method includes generating an integrated architecture blueprint, by an information technology unit of a business, including a design for at least a portion of the software systems for supporting the impacted business processes, and developing, by outsourced developers of the entity, the software systems according to the integrated architecture blueprint.
- the method also provides for integrating, by the information technology unit, the software systems developed by the outsourced developers into a computing production environment of the business.
- a method for enterprise development of projects includes providing an enterprise project development system and defining a business concept associated with a business intent via the enterprise project development system.
- the method includes discovering the functional and system requirements related to the business concept and defining the project via the enterprise project development system.
- An integration portion of a design specification for the project is created by an information technology unit via the enterprise project development system.
- the method also provides for designing and developing, by outsourced supplier, project software based on the design specification, and testing the project software against the design specification, including planning of test activities via the enterprise project development system.
- the method also includes deploying, by the information technology unit, the project software in a computing production environment, including planning the deployment and implementation activities via the enterprise project development system.
- FIGS. 1A and 1B are a block diagram depicting an embodiment of the Define phase of the Enterprise Development Process.
- FIGS. 2A , 2 B, and 2 C are a block diagram depicting an embodiment of the Discover phase of the Enterprise Development Process.
- FIGS. 3A and 3B are a block diagram depicting an embodiment of the Design phase of the Enterprise Development Process.
- FIGS. 4A and 4B are a block diagram depicting an embodiment of the Develop phase of the Enterprise Development Process.
- FIGS. 5A and 5B are a block diagram depicting an embodiment of the Deploy phase of the Enterprise Development Process.
- An Enterprise Development Process can be employed to facilitate the integration of enterprise architecture and provide rigor to the process of enterprise-wide software development. Consistent checkpoints throughout the process allow significant events to occur in a predictable, scheduled manner.
- EDP Enterprise Development Process
- the EDP described in that document relates to an integrated environment for defining, gathering, and disseminating project-related information where all work is performed within a single enterprise.
- the present disclosure describes an EDP process where a portion of the work is performed by a service provider external to an enterprise employing the EDP. More specifically, software code development activities within the EDP are outsourced to an entity outside the enterprise.
- the EDP process is described in broad terms herein; more detailed descriptions of the steps in the process can be found in the patent application referenced and incorporated above.
- the business/non-IT group typically consists of management or executive level personnel who are not directly involved with technology-related activities. Coordination and oversight of technology-related activities is done by a group within the enterprise that can be referred to as the IT group.
- the actual software code development activities are conducted by a group outside the enterprise that can be referred to as the supplier, which may be outsourced contractors such as computer software developers. Activities performed by the supplier in this version of the EDP would have been carried out by in-house personnel in earlier versions of the EDP.
- the software development activities within an enterprise can be broken down into multiple applications, where an application can be defined as a set of programs designed to perform a specific function or functions.
- Software development projects that involve multiple applications are broken into separate respective applications.
- only activities within the single applications are outsourced to suppliers, although a supplier may have multiple separate applications. All integration activities are managed and retained in-house by the IT group. This allows the enterprise to maintain governance over the enterprise-wide computing architecture and to control the integration of multiple applications into large-scale projects.
- a supplier working on several related applications may provide some integration of those applications but the IT group would still provide integration oversight.
- the enterprise can implement standards that it expects suppliers to follow to ensure quality and consistency in the software code provided by the suppliers. This also promotes interchangeability among suppliers and prevents the enterprise from becoming dependent on a single supplier.
- the EDP process typically comprises five phases: Define, Discover, Design, Develop, and Deploy.
- the Define phase encompasses processes that define the strategic intent of an enterprise and concepts that are aligned with the strategic intent. Robust concept definition and ensuing communications ensure a proposed approach is on target with what a business wants delivered. Alignment with strategic network and IT architectures is also facilitated. As a side benefit, the Define phase can reduce estimation time averages.
- the Discover phase refers to the processes that help discover functional and system requirements in support of business requirements.
- the Discover phase facilitates a “process-driven” approach to requirements gathering.
- the analysis conducted in the Discover phase verifies the business processes envisioned and elicits all the requirements of the project. These requirements are documented in a centralized repository along with the business and system process models, thus enabling traceability and reuse on subsequent projects.
- As a by-product of the Discover phase analysis it is possible to automatically generate interfaces as well as test workflows and test cases. These automation capabilities shorten the test window and overall project cycle time.
- the Design phase deals with the processes that constitute definition of physical design specifications and that will serve as the basis for development efforts.
- the Design phase allows a consistent level of design detail across all development teams. This helps reduce the integration test window by enabling all development teams to develop to the correct interface specifications. Ultimately, this can result in shorter test windows and faster speed to market.
- the Develop phase concerns the processes that create and test application systems and program code software according to the specifications detailed in the Design phase.
- the Deploy phase involves processes for planning and implementing the activities required to migrate projects, including program code, from the development environment to the production environment.
- the Define phase of the EDP typically comprises four steps, Intent, Ideation, Feasibility, and Estimation.
- Intent refers to processes that help define the business's strategic intent through the integration of mission, goals, objective, and capability models. Business-related decisions are made at this point without consideration of feasibility or design.
- the Ideation step encompasses formal and informal idea generation and the rigor of idea selection via validation against strategic intent.
- a problem is defined in the context of Intent and a technical approach to the problem is developed. Ideation also ensures that the definitions of concepts are aligned with the strategic intent.
- the Feasibility step facilitates determination of technical approach, critical functional impacts, impacted systems, and overall feasibility of concepts prior to Estimation. Customer expectations can be managed by determining if the customer's expected delivery date is feasible. Within the Feasibility step, a concept is typically reviewed for completeness and then classified according to size, complexity, and proposed process paths.
- the Estimation step facilitates estimation of level of effort (LOE) to aid with prioritization and investment decisions.
- LOE level of effort
- An appropriate capacity of personnel, hardware, and other resources can be reserved as needed to complete a project.
- the Estimation step can comprise the submission of an estimation blueprint to an estimation team, an estimation of LOE drivers, and an estimation review session.
- FIGS. 1A and 1B illustrate an embodiment of the Define phase 100 .
- the Define phase 100 consists of the Intent step 112 , the Ideation step 114 , the Feasibility step 116 , and the Estimation step 118 .
- Three lanes of activities are shown, where lane 120 depicts activities performed by the business/non-IT group, lane 160 depicts activities performed by the IT group, and lane 180 depicts activities performed by the supplier.
- the Intent step 112 within the Define phase 100 is conducted entirely by the business/non-IT group.
- Intent 112 consists of the business/non-IT group creating or updating a strategic intent plan in box 124 .
- a strategic intent model 126 is the output of this step.
- the Intent step 112 ensures that the requirements of the business/non-IT group are well defined.
- the business/non-IT group In the Ideation step 114 , the business/non-IT group generates or forms an idea for a software development project in box 130 and an idea 132 is the output.
- the IT group may generate ideas, such as concepts for improvements, as well.
- the business/non-IT group creates or evaluates a concept for a software development project in box 134 , where a concept might combine and/or more strictly define one or more ideas.
- a set of business requirements 136 for the concept is the output.
- the IT group then reviews the concept in box 162 . Since the IT group will act as a liaison between the business/non-IT group and the supplier, this review is conducted to ensure that the IT group thoroughly understands the intent of the concept and that the business requirements properly reflect that intent.
- the IT group does not necessarily communicate the concept intent and business requirements to the supplier at this time but merely attempts to understand the intent and requirements so that the intent and requirements can be communicated at a later time if necessary. This can prevent the need for change orders later in the course of a project.
- the Define process then moves to the Feasibility step 116 , where the business/non-IT group determines an approach to and the feasibility of a concept in box 140 .
- the IT group also determines an approach to and the feasibility of the concept in box 164 . If necessary, the supplier can be consulted to assess the application impact in box 182 .
- the business/non-IT group assesses the functional and critical impacts of the concept in box 142 .
- a feasibility assessment document 144 is the output of this assessment.
- the IT group After the business/non-IT group and the IT group have determined the approach and feasibility in boxes 140 and 164 , respectively, the IT group creates an integrated architecture blueprint in box 166 , with an integrated architecture blueprint document 168 as the output.
- the supplier reviews the integrated architecture blueprint in box 184 .
- the IT group determines impacted systems in box 170 and the supplier reviews the impacted systems in box 186 .
- the process moves to the Estimation step 118 .
- the business/non-IT group, the IT group, and the supplier independently estimate the costs they are likely to incur in the implementation of the concept in boxes 148 , 172 , and 188 , respectively.
- These estimates produce estimated cost documents 150 , 174 , and 190 , respectively.
- the IT group verifies its own estimates.
- the IT group verifies its own cost estimates as well as those of the supplier in box 176 .
- the verification of a cost estimate provided by an outside entity may require a higher level of scrutiny and a greater amount of due diligence compared to the verification of an internally created cost estimate.
- a two-level validation process may be employed where verification at the application level is done to ensure that an application retains its function and then a verification of overall project cost is done.
- the business/non-IT group reviews the concept for approval in box 152 .
- the Discover phase of the EDP is typically comprised of four steps, Functional Requirements Modeling (FRM), System Requirements Modeling (SRM), Application Integration Modeling (AIM), and Contract.
- FRM facilitates identification of functional requirements, linked to supporting business requirements. Each functional requirement typically maps to a business requirement. Typically, no IT evaluation is done at this point.
- resource planning can be conducted in which the scope of a project, the business requirements, impacted processes, a schedule, and resource assignments are detailed.
- the functional requirements can be modeled by creating prototypes, modeling impacted functional work flows, capturing functional requirements, mapping functional requirements to business requirements, and/or capturing assumptions and issues.
- a comprehensive requirements document containing this information can be created and the integrated architecture blueprint produced in the Define phase can be updated.
- a checkpoint is conducted to verify deliverables, resolve outstanding issues, determine course of action, if necessary.
- SRM facilitates identification of system requirements, linked to supporting functional requirements. Each system requirement typically maps to a functional requirement. As with FRM, several activities can occur within the SRM step.
- the system requirements can be modeled by creating prototypes, modeling impacted system work flows, capturing system requirements, mapping system requirements to functional requirements, and/or validating requirements against IT and network architecture.
- the comprehensive requirements document can be updated with the system requirements and the integrated architecture blueprint can be updated with information architecture, technical architecture, and application architecture information.
- a checkpoint is conducted to verify deliverables, resolve outstanding issues, determine course of action, if necessary. IT personnel can then provide packages of options for approaching a problem and business-oriented personnel can choose an appropriate option.
- the Application Integration Modeling (AIM) step of the Discover phase facilitates identification of inter- and intra-application approaches, with formalized focus on application interface modeling.
- the Contract step of the Discover phase creates visibility and accountability to an integrated view of a project (scope, schedule, and cost).
- FIGS. 2A , 2 B, and 2 C illustrate an embodiment of the Discover phase 200 of the EDP process.
- the Discover phase 200 consists of the FRM step 212 , the SRM step 214 , the AIM step 216 , and the Contract step 218 .
- three lanes of activities are shown.
- One lane 220 consists of activities performed by the business/non-IT group
- another lane 230 consists of activities performed by IT group
- another lane 280 consists of activities performed by the supplier.
- the IT group conducts resource planning in box 232 . This can include defining the scope of the concept such as the business requirements, the impacted processes, and the integrated architecture blueprint. Also, an approach can be discovered and a schedule can be set at this point. The business/non-IT group and the supplier then assign resources as appropriate in boxes 221 and 282 , respectively. An IT project management plan document 234 is the output of this process.
- the business/non-IT group determines the functional requirements for a project in box 223 . This can include modeling and reviewing impacted functional workflows; capturing functional requirements such as user requirements, network and business requirements, testing requirements, and security requirements; mapping functional requirements to business requirements; capturing assumptions and issues; and demonstrating the capabilities of commercial off-the-shelf products and prototypes, if applicable.
- the IT group supports and verifies the functional requirements definition in box 236 .
- the determination of functional requirements would be strictly a business/non-IT group activity and the IT group would not be involved.
- the IT group while not actively defining the functional requirements, might take a more active role in supporting and verifying the functional requirements definition. This helps ensure that the IT group can accurately convey the functional requirements to the supplier and thus prevents change orders later in the course of a project.
- a functional requirements document 225 is the output of this process.
- the supplier reviews the functional requirements in box 284 .
- This review can take the form of a walkthrough in which the business/non-IT group, the IT group, and the supplier jointly examine the proposed functional requirements and reach an agreement on a final set of functional requirements.
- the business/non-IT group signs off on the functional requirements in box 227 .
- This sign-off serves as a formal acknowledgement of the scope of the project from the business/non-IT group that it is sponsoring the project, and that it is accountable for the functional requirements and any changes later made to them. This sign off is an attempt to minimize unnecessary and potentially costly changes to the requirements later in the development life cycle.
- the IT group then reviews the actions that have been taken in the FRM step 212 by conducting a step checkpoint in box 238 .
- the IT project management plan document 240 can be updated at this point if necessary.
- the supplier determines the system requirements in box 286 . This can include modeling and reviewing impacted system workflows, capturing system requirements, mapping system requirements to functional requirements, validating requirements against IT and network architecture, and demonstrating the capabilities of commercial off-the-shelf products and prototypes, if applicable.
- the IT group supports and verifies the system requirements definitions created by the supplier. This support and verification is analogous to the support and verification that occurs in the FRM step 212 .
- FRM 212 it is the responsibility of the business/non-IT group to define functional requirements while the IT group provides support and verification.
- SRM 214 it is the responsibility of the supplier to define system requirements while the IT group provides support and verification. In an embodiment, the same personnel within the IT group provide support and verification to both the business/non-IT group and the supplier.
- the outputs of the system requirements definition 286 and the system requirements verification 242 are system requirements documents 288 and 244 , respectively.
- the IT group reviews the actions that have been taken in the SRM step 214 by conducting a step checkpoint in box 246 .
- the IT project management plan document 248 can be updated at this point if necessary.
- the IT group determines an application integration approach in box 250 . That is, the IT group models the integration between the applications.
- the supplier supports the IT group in determining the application integration approach in box 290 .
- the supplier determines an application approach in box 292 , with an application architecture blueprint document 294 as the output.
- the IT group verifies the application architecture blueprint in box 256 . This verification step was not performed in earlier versions of the EDP since, in those versions, the determination of an application approach was done in-house.
- the IT group updates the integrated architecture blueprint in box 252 , with an updated integrated architecture blueprint document 254 as the output.
- the IT group then creates a preliminary integrated test plan in box 258 and the supplier reviews the preliminary integrated test plan in box 296 .
- a preliminary integrated test plan document 260 is the output.
- the IT group once again conducts a step checkpoint in box 262 and updates the IT project management plan document 264 if necessary.
- the IT group assembles an IT contract in box 266 .
- the contract is an agreement between the business/non-IT group and the IT group and typically includes a scope, cost, and schedule.
- the supplier assembles a supplier subcontract in box 298 .
- the supplier subcontract is an agreement between the IT group and the supplier and also typically includes a scope, cost, and schedule.
- the IT group verifies the supplier subcontract in box 270 .
- the creation of a contract between the business/non-IT group and the IT group was a typical step in the earlier versions of the EDP but the creation of the subcontract between the IT group and the supplier and the verification of the subcontract were not necessary in earlier versions because all work was done in-house.
- An IT contract document 268 is the output of these processes. Before a final contract is presented to the business/non-IT group for review, the cost estimates provided by the supplier in its subcontract with the IT group are aggregated with the cost estimates provided by the IT group in its contract with the business/non-IT group. The business/non-IT group is given a total estimated cost per application, as was the case in earlier versions of the EDP.
- the IT group conducts a step checkpoint in box 272 and updates the IT project management plan document 274 if necessary.
- the business/non-IT group then reviews the project for approval in box 229 .
- the Design phase of the EDP process is typically comprised of two steps, Integration Design and Application Design.
- Integration Design defines the inter-application physical design specification that becomes a common point of reference and is binding for intra-application design. It encompasses physical information (data), environment, and security specifications.
- ICDs Interface Control Documents
- IDL Interface Definition Language
- An integration database design can then be created, incorporating a database logical model, a database physical model, and data access mappings.
- the integration design document can be updated at this point if necessary.
- the integration design can be validated by reviewing the design's impact on other applications and resolving any major issues.
- the Application Design step of the Design phase defines the intra-application physical design specification encompassing physical information (database) design.
- the intra-application design specifications are determined, including the selection of user interfaces such as screen layouts, report layouts, and invoice mockups.
- An application design document can be created at this point.
- the integration design document and the application design document together comprise a design specification that can provide the basis for the development effort.
- an application database design can be created, incorporating a database logical model, a database physical model, and data access mappings.
- the application design document can be updated at this point if necessary.
- the application design can then be validated against the integration design document, the integrated architecture blueprint, and system requirements and capacities. Finally, a peer review can be conducted.
- FIGS. 3A and 3B illustrate an embodiment of the Design phase 300 consisting of an Integration Design step 312 and an Application Design step 314 . Again, three lanes of activities are shown, with one lane 320 consisting of activities performed by the business/non-IT group, another lane 330 consisting of activities performed by IT group, and another lane 360 consisting of activities performed by the supplier.
- the IT group conducts resource planning in box 332 . This can include reviewing the scope of the project, determining integration and application approaches, and setting a schedule.
- the supplier assigns resources to the project in box 362 .
- An IT project management plan document 334 can be updated as a result of these processes.
- the IT group determines inter-application design specifications in box 336 preferably in a form of an integrated design document. This can include design specifications, database design, ICDs, IDLs, and copybooks, as applicable and becomes a binding document for all application design.
- the supplier supports the inter-application design in box 364 .
- the IT group determines an integration database design in box 338 and the supplier supports the integration database design in box 366 . This can include an integration database logical model, an integration database physical model, and data access mappings.
- the IT group completes an integration design document in box 340 and the supplier reviews the integration design document in box 368 .
- the integration design document 342 is the output of these processes.
- the IT group then reviews the actions that have been taken in the Integration Design step 312 by conducting a step checkpoint in box 344 .
- the IT project management plan document 346 can be updated at this point if necessary. All of the actions of the supplier in the Integration Design step 312 are similar to that undertaken by the IT group in earlier versions of the EDP.
- the supplier determines the application design specifications in box 370 . This can include the selection of user interfaces such as screen layouts, report layouts, and invoice mockups as well as the design of object models and specification statements.
- the supplier takes the lead in this process and is the owner of the application design.
- the IT group does not assist the supplier in this effort and becomes involved only if the supplier needs to communicate with the business/non-IT group regarding reports, layouts, or other design matters.
- the IT group acts as a liaison between the supplier and the business/non-IT group as indicated in box 348 , where the IT group coordinates user verification.
- This is a change from previous versions of the EDP where the IT group could communicate directly with the business/non-IT group without the need for an intermediary.
- the business/non-IT group validates the application design specifications in box 322 .
- the IT group completes a logical database design in box 350 and the supplier determines a physical database design in box 372 .
- the supplier then creates one or more application design documents in box 374 and the IT group verifies the application design documents in box 352 .
- the verification step was not necessary in previous versions of the EDP since the design and verification were done in-house.
- Application design documents 376 are the output of these processes.
- the IT group then reviews the actions that have been taken in the Application Design step 314 by conducting a step checkpoint in box 354 .
- the IT project management plan document 356 can be updated at this point if necessary.
- the Develop phase of the EDP typically consists of two steps, Application Code and Testing and Integrated Testing.
- Application Code and Testing refers to processes for creating and testing application system source code according to design specifications and IT standards. Applicable levels of testing are encompassed within the confinement of the application system (e.g., unit, string, system).
- a consolidated application test plan can be formed, including plans for unit and system testing, the test environment, test data, and test automation tools.
- the completed plan can be recorded in an application test plan document.
- Code development can be performed in parallel with test planning. Code development can comprise completing a software configuration management plan, locating reusable code, creating or modifying software, validating the software against IT standards, and conducting code walkthroughs and peer reviews.
- Integrated Testing refers to planning and execution of testing activities to ensure successful integration of application systems. Processes are performed that test the end-to-end business functionality across application systems. In the Integrated Testing step, a consolidated integration test plan can be created, including plans for inter-application connectivity testing, end-to-end testing, production-readiness testing, the test environment, test data, and automation tools. An integrated test plan document containing this information can be created.
- Inter-application connectivity tests, end-to-end tests, and production readiness tests can then be performed, each involving setting up a test environment, completing a database environment, creating test data, performing tests, and validating test results.
- the inter-application connectivity tests deal with hardware and application connectivity.
- the end-to-end tests involve end-to-end business functionality, regression testing, and acceptance testing, as applicable.
- the production readiness tests deal with volume, stress, and performance testing.
- the supplier completes test data and databases and, in box 474 , the supplier performs application testing. This can include setting up a test environment, completing a database environment, creating test data, performing tests, and validating test results.
- the IT group verifies the test results in box 436 and, if necessary, the business/non-IT group validates the test results in box 422 .
- the IT group then reviews the actions that have been taken in the Application Code and Testing step 412 by conducting a step checkpoint in box 438 .
- the IT project management plan document 440 can be updated at this point if necessary.
- the IT group leads and/or coordinates inter-application connectivity tests in box 446 and the supplier supports and/or performs the inter-application connectivity tests in box 478 . These involve setting up a test environment, completing a database environment, creating test data, performing hardware connectivity and application connectivity tests, and validating test results.
- the IT group leads and/or coordinates end-to-end tests in box 448 .
- the supplier supports and/or performs the end-to-end tests in box 480 and the business/non-IT group validates the test results in box 424 .
- the end-to-end tests involve creating test data, performing end-to-end functionality tests, performing regression tests if applicable, validating test results, and gaining user acceptance.
- the Deploy phase of the EDP process typically encompasses two steps, Production Migration and Production Warranty.
- Production Migration defines the planning, execution, and verification activities required for migration from the development environment to the production (operational) environment.
- a deployment plan, a deployment schedule, an environment buildout plan, and a warranty agreement can be finalized and validated with all impacted parties.
- This deployment plan can be recorded in a deployment plan document.
- the production environment set-up is typically completed at this point, including implementation of a database, user training, and documentation.
- Code is then migrated to the production environment and the migration is verified.
- Code migration can involve the IT group integrating the software systems developed by the suppliers into a computing production environment. For example, the software systems might be installed on one or more computer systems of an enterprise.
- Production Warranty refers to the activities required during the transition period between deployment and on-going maintenance (also known as the warranty period) to ensure successful deployment. Support is provided during this time to resolve any production issues and facilitate transition to production support (operations). If a problem is identified in the warranty period, it is analyzed, isolated, and repaired. The repair is then verified and user acceptance is gained. The project can then be turned over to a production support group for ongoing maintenance and the project is closed out.
- the IT group completes an integrated deployment plan in box 532 . This can involve validating and finalizing the plan with impacted parties, setting a deployment schedule, performing an environment buildout, and reaching a warranty agreement.
- the business/non-IT group and the supplier review the deployment plan in boxes 522 and 562 , respectively.
- An integrated deployment plan document 534 is the output from these processes.
- the IT group then reviews the actions that have been taken in the Production Migration step 512 by conducting a step checkpoint in box 540 .
- the IT project management plan document 542 can be updated at this point if necessary.
- the IT group analyzes and isolates problems in box 544 .
- the supplier fixes the problems in box 568 and the business/non-IT group validates the resolution in box 526 .
- the IT group then reviews the actions that have been taken in the Production Warranty step 514 by conducting a step checkpoint/phase review in box 546 .
- the IT project management plan document 548 can be updated at this point if necessary.
- the IT group then closes out the project in box 550 .
- the actions described above are performed by means of an enterprise project development system that can be referred to as a Portal.
- the Portal is a web-based software application that supports a process-based, activity-based management model of software development by providing an organization-wide, standardized means of collecting, managing, and reporting on work flowing through the software development process.
- the Portal can provide a real-time, synergistic combination of a collaboration tool, a reporting interface, and a planning/execution environment.
- the Portal enables all parties associated with a project to see its status and allows information about a project to be documented from its inception.
- the Portal can provide a common touch-point for collecting and managing project information. It can also be a vehicle for collaboratively planning, managing, and executing a project and for distributing up-to-date project information in real time, without additional post-processing or analysis. In addition, it can provide a standardized means of collecting and analyzing process performance data by acting as a data warehouse that “distills” performance information from actual activity as a project progresses through time. Project information can be entered into the Portal automatically when certain events occur or can be maintained directly by users of the tool as part of their normal job-function workflow.
- the Portal can integrate itself into the work environment by becoming the primary point of contact for reporting and disseminating project status, performance, and other project information. It can provide the primary interface for project workflow at the process level.
- the design can incorporate a workflow model organized by process touch-points, such that process steps have “work queues” from which process data are collected or presented when a project reaches a specific step.
- the Portal can be considered a series of web-based graphical user interfaces, or screens, in which project-related data can be viewed or edited.
- a set of screens can show the process flows for various phases of a concept or project.
Landscapes
- Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
- Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- Human Resources & Organizations (AREA)
- Strategic Management (AREA)
- Economics (AREA)
- Entrepreneurship & Innovation (AREA)
- Educational Administration (AREA)
- Game Theory and Decision Science (AREA)
- Development Economics (AREA)
- Marketing (AREA)
- Operations Research (AREA)
- Quality & Reliability (AREA)
- Tourism & Hospitality (AREA)
- Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- General Business, Economics & Management (AREA)
- General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
- Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
- Management, Administration, Business Operations System, And Electronic Commerce (AREA)
Abstract
Description
Claims (17)
Priority Applications (1)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US10/857,287 US7849438B1 (en) | 2004-05-27 | 2004-05-27 | Enterprise software development process for outsourced developers |
Applications Claiming Priority (1)
Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
---|---|---|---|
US10/857,287 US7849438B1 (en) | 2004-05-27 | 2004-05-27 | Enterprise software development process for outsourced developers |
Publications (1)
Publication Number | Publication Date |
---|---|
US7849438B1 true US7849438B1 (en) | 2010-12-07 |
Family
ID=43244225
Family Applications (1)
Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
---|---|---|---|
US10/857,287 Expired - Fee Related US7849438B1 (en) | 2004-05-27 | 2004-05-27 | Enterprise software development process for outsourced developers |
Country Status (1)
Country | Link |
---|---|
US (1) | US7849438B1 (en) |
Cited By (45)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US20060247959A1 (en) * | 2005-04-29 | 2006-11-02 | Tracy Oden | System and method for provisioning, fulfilling, and delivering full service information technology, management and other professional services and ancillary consulting support in real time via an integrated technology architecture while enabling end clients to procure, transact and receive these services and associated work products, on demand, in a just-in-time (JIT) fashion. |
US20080046299A1 (en) * | 2006-08-16 | 2008-02-21 | Aware Software, Inc. | Methods and tools for creating and evaluating system blueprints |
US20080255693A1 (en) * | 2007-04-13 | 2008-10-16 | Chaar Jarir K | Software Factory Readiness Review |
US20090089121A1 (en) * | 2007-09-27 | 2009-04-02 | Siemens Aktiengesellschaft | Method and system for controlling a project |
US20090100344A1 (en) * | 2007-10-12 | 2009-04-16 | The Pnc Financial Services Group, Inc. | Mainframe-based browser |
US20090100402A1 (en) * | 2007-10-12 | 2009-04-16 | The Pnc Financial Services Group, Inc. | Configuring and constructing applications in a mainframe-based computing environment |
US20090187880A1 (en) * | 2008-01-23 | 2009-07-23 | International Business Machines Corporation | Customized networked-based commerce system packages |
US20090240552A1 (en) * | 2006-04-21 | 2009-09-24 | Dmd Co., Ltd. | Network-based information technology solution development and management system and method |
US20090254906A1 (en) * | 2005-07-25 | 2009-10-08 | Liang-Jie Zhang | Method and apparatus for enabling enterprise project management with service oriented resource and using a process profiling frameword |
US20090265699A1 (en) * | 2008-04-18 | 2009-10-22 | Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (Publ) | Methods and systems for embedding upgrade steps for layered architectures |
US20090300577A1 (en) * | 2008-05-29 | 2009-12-03 | International Business Machines Corporation | Determining competence levels of factory teams working within a software factory |
US20090319316A1 (en) * | 2008-06-19 | 2009-12-24 | Kurt Westerfeld | Method and System of Using Structured Social Networks and Communities to Create and Maintain Business Service Models |
US20090319313A1 (en) * | 2003-11-04 | 2009-12-24 | Ghaisas Smita Subash | Method of automation of business processes and apparatus therefor |
US20100023919A1 (en) * | 2008-07-23 | 2010-01-28 | International Business Machines Corporation | Application/service event root cause traceability causal and impact analyzer |
US20100063910A1 (en) * | 2008-09-05 | 2010-03-11 | Oracle International Corporation | Providing a unified view of contract revenue and invoice details |
US20100162200A1 (en) * | 2005-08-31 | 2010-06-24 | Jastec Co., Ltd. | Software development production management system, computer program, and recording medium |
US20100257012A1 (en) * | 2006-05-22 | 2010-10-07 | Simon Walker | Lead management system |
US7930201B1 (en) | 2002-08-19 | 2011-04-19 | Sprint Communications Company L.P. | EDP portal cross-process integrated view |
US20110191748A1 (en) * | 2010-01-29 | 2011-08-04 | International Business Machines Corporation | Systems and methods for design time service verification and validation |
US20110289473A1 (en) * | 2008-11-26 | 2011-11-24 | Shigeru Koyama | Software modification estimate method and software modification estimate system |
US20110296021A1 (en) * | 2010-05-28 | 2011-12-01 | International Business Machines Corporation | Enabling Service Virtualization in a Cloud |
US8214240B1 (en) | 2011-01-28 | 2012-07-03 | Fmr Llc | Method and system for allocation of resources in a project portfolio |
US8448129B2 (en) | 2008-07-31 | 2013-05-21 | International Business Machines Corporation | Work packet delegation in a software factory |
US8484065B1 (en) | 2005-07-14 | 2013-07-09 | Sprint Communications Company L.P. | Small enhancement process workflow manager |
US8527329B2 (en) | 2008-07-15 | 2013-09-03 | International Business Machines Corporation | Configuring design centers, assembly lines and job shops of a global delivery network into “on demand” factories |
US8612283B1 (en) * | 2006-06-30 | 2013-12-17 | At&T Intellectual Property Ii, L.P. | Method and apparatus for evaluating the cost of operating a network infrastructure |
US8660878B2 (en) | 2011-06-15 | 2014-02-25 | International Business Machines Corporation | Model-driven assignment of work to a software factory |
US8667469B2 (en) | 2008-05-29 | 2014-03-04 | International Business Machines Corporation | Staged automated validation of work packets inputs and deliverables in a software factory |
US8671007B2 (en) | 2008-07-15 | 2014-03-11 | International Business Machines Corporation | Work packet enabled active project management schedule |
US20140082583A1 (en) * | 2012-09-14 | 2014-03-20 | Sap Ag | System and method for estimating scope and effort of software deployment |
US8694969B2 (en) | 2008-07-31 | 2014-04-08 | International Business Machines Corporation | Analyzing factory processes in a software factory |
US8782598B2 (en) | 2008-07-31 | 2014-07-15 | International Business Machines Corporation | Supporting a work packet request with a specifically tailored IDE |
US20140228978A1 (en) * | 2011-09-19 | 2014-08-14 | Ralf Neubert | Method for generating and handling applications for components of a distributed control system and engineering system for implementing the process |
US20140344210A1 (en) * | 2013-05-17 | 2014-11-20 | Oracle International Corporation | Use of projector and selector component types for etl map design |
US9218261B2 (en) | 2013-09-18 | 2015-12-22 | Bank Of America Corporation | Test case execution |
US9256424B1 (en) * | 2014-09-26 | 2016-02-09 | Oracle International Corporation | Managing software configurations across different target software deployments |
US9383976B1 (en) * | 2015-01-15 | 2016-07-05 | Xerox Corporation | Methods and systems for crowdsourcing software development project |
US10073690B2 (en) | 2014-09-26 | 2018-09-11 | Oracle International Corporation | Populating content for a base version of an image |
US10127141B2 (en) | 2017-02-20 | 2018-11-13 | Bank Of America Corporation | Electronic technology resource evaluation system |
US10216814B2 (en) | 2013-05-17 | 2019-02-26 | Oracle International Corporation | Supporting combination of flow based ETL and entity relationship based ETL |
US10387297B1 (en) * | 2016-06-15 | 2019-08-20 | Amdocs Development Limited | System, method, and computer program for end-to-end test management of a software testing project |
US20200183820A1 (en) * | 2018-12-05 | 2020-06-11 | Sap Se | Non-regressive injection of deception decoys |
US10824414B2 (en) | 2014-09-26 | 2020-11-03 | Oracle International Corporation | Drift management of images |
US10868709B2 (en) | 2018-09-10 | 2020-12-15 | Oracle International Corporation | Determining the health of other nodes in a same cluster based on physical link information |
US11977858B2 (en) | 2022-02-07 | 2024-05-07 | T-Mobile Usa, Inc. | Centralized intake and capacity assessment platform for project processes, such as with product development in telecommunications |
Citations (110)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US5208765A (en) | 1990-07-20 | 1993-05-04 | Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. | Computer-based method and system for product development |
US5548506A (en) | 1994-03-17 | 1996-08-20 | Srinivasan; Seshan R. | Automated, electronic network based, project management server system, for managing multiple work-groups |
US5557515A (en) | 1989-08-11 | 1996-09-17 | Hartford Fire Insurance Company, Inc. | Computerized system and method for work management |
US5692125A (en) | 1995-05-09 | 1997-11-25 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for scheduling linked events with fixed and dynamic conditions |
US5729746A (en) * | 1992-12-08 | 1998-03-17 | Leonard; Ricky Jack | Computerized interactive tool for developing a software product that provides convergent metrics for estimating the final size of the product throughout the development process using the life-cycle model |
US5758328A (en) | 1996-02-22 | 1998-05-26 | Giovannoli; Joseph | Computerized quotation system and method |
US5765140A (en) | 1995-11-17 | 1998-06-09 | Mci Corporation | Dynamic project management system |
US5784539A (en) | 1996-11-26 | 1998-07-21 | Client-Server-Networking Solutions, Inc. | Quality driven expert system |
US5815152A (en) | 1995-04-18 | 1998-09-29 | Logical Software Solutions Corporation | Method and apparatus for defining and evaluating a graphic rule |
US5848393A (en) | 1995-12-15 | 1998-12-08 | Ncr Corporation | "What if . . . " function for simulating operations within a task workflow management system |
US5864480A (en) | 1995-08-17 | 1999-01-26 | Ncr Corporation | Computer-implemented electronic product development |
US5893074A (en) | 1996-01-29 | 1999-04-06 | California Institute Of Technology | Network based task management |
US5930798A (en) * | 1996-08-15 | 1999-07-27 | Predicate Logic, Inc. | Universal data measurement, analysis and control system |
US5949999A (en) * | 1996-11-25 | 1999-09-07 | Siemens Corporate Research, Inc. | Software testing and requirements tracking |
US5960200A (en) * | 1996-05-03 | 1999-09-28 | I-Cube | System to transition an enterprise to a distributed infrastructure |
US5974392A (en) | 1995-02-14 | 1999-10-26 | Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba | Work flow system for task allocation and reallocation |
US5999908A (en) | 1992-08-06 | 1999-12-07 | Abelow; Daniel H. | Customer-based product design module |
US6011917A (en) | 1995-08-23 | 2000-01-04 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and computer system for generating process management computer programs from process models |
US6289502B1 (en) | 1997-09-26 | 2001-09-11 | Massachusetts Institute Of Technology | Model-based software design and validation |
US6324647B1 (en) | 1999-08-31 | 2001-11-27 | Michel K. Bowman-Amuah | System, method and article of manufacture for security management in a development architecture framework |
US20020026630A1 (en) | 2000-08-28 | 2002-02-28 | John Schmidt | Enterprise application integration methodology |
US20020032596A1 (en) | 2000-09-12 | 2002-03-14 | International Business Machines Corporation | Workflow in a paperless office |
US20020042731A1 (en) | 2000-10-06 | 2002-04-11 | King Joseph A. | Method, system and tools for performing business-related planning |
US20020046394A1 (en) | 1999-12-06 | 2002-04-18 | Sung-Hee Do | Method and apparatus for producing software |
US20020049816A1 (en) | 2000-03-24 | 2002-04-25 | Costin William Gilmore | System and method for raising funds and establishing user affinity over a distributed network |
US20020059512A1 (en) | 2000-10-16 | 2002-05-16 | Lisa Desjardins | Method and system for managing an information technology project |
US6405364B1 (en) * | 1999-08-31 | 2002-06-11 | Accenture Llp | Building techniques in a development architecture framework |
US20020087381A1 (en) | 2000-12-29 | 2002-07-04 | Freeman Darlene M. | Project management for complex construction projects by monitoring subcontractors in real time |
US6424948B1 (en) | 1999-02-19 | 2002-07-23 | Guozhu Dong | Declarative workflow system supporting side-effects |
US20020147801A1 (en) | 2001-01-29 | 2002-10-10 | Gullotta Tony J. | System and method for provisioning resources to users based on policies, roles, organizational information, and attributes |
US6505176B2 (en) | 1998-06-12 | 2003-01-07 | First American Credit Management Solutions, Inc. | Workflow management system for an automated credit application system |
US20030018952A1 (en) | 2001-07-13 | 2003-01-23 | Roetzheim William H. | System and method to estimate resource usage for a software development project |
US20030023675A1 (en) | 1997-07-28 | 2003-01-30 | Ouchi Norman Ken | Workflow systems and methods for project management and information management |
US6519571B1 (en) | 1999-05-27 | 2003-02-11 | Accenture Llp | Dynamic customer profile management |
US20030033191A1 (en) | 2000-06-15 | 2003-02-13 | Xis Incorporated | Method and apparatus for a product lifecycle management process |
US20030055811A1 (en) | 2001-09-20 | 2003-03-20 | Ricoh Company, Ltd. | Document controlled workflow systems and methods |
US20030061266A1 (en) | 2001-09-27 | 2003-03-27 | Norman Ken Ouchi | Project workflow system |
US6574605B1 (en) | 1998-11-17 | 2003-06-03 | Citibank, N.A. | Method and system for strategic services enterprise workload management |
US20030110067A1 (en) | 2001-12-07 | 2003-06-12 | Accenture Global Services Gmbh | Accelerated process improvement framework |
US6601234B1 (en) | 1999-08-31 | 2003-07-29 | Accenture Llp | Attribute dictionary in a business logic services environment |
US20030145124A1 (en) | 1999-05-04 | 2003-07-31 | George V. Guyan | Method and article of manufacture for component based task handling during claim processing |
US20030171970A1 (en) | 2002-03-11 | 2003-09-11 | Robert Kinsella | Project scheduler interface |
US20030181991A1 (en) | 2002-03-08 | 2003-09-25 | Agile Software Corporation | System and method for managing and monitoring multiple workflows |
US6636585B2 (en) | 2000-06-26 | 2003-10-21 | Bearingpoint, Inc. | Metrics-related testing of an operational support system (OSS) of an incumbent provider for compliance with a regulatory scheme |
US6658643B1 (en) * | 2000-08-23 | 2003-12-02 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and apparatus for computer software analysis |
US6662357B1 (en) * | 1999-08-31 | 2003-12-09 | Accenture Llp | Managing information in an integrated development architecture framework |
US6671818B1 (en) | 1999-11-22 | 2003-12-30 | Accenture Llp | Problem isolation through translating and filtering events into a standard object format in a network based supply chain |
US20040002883A1 (en) | 2002-06-27 | 2004-01-01 | Andrews Keith H. | Method for linking solution-specific method and process deliverables to business-based delivery framework |
US6684191B1 (en) | 1999-11-22 | 2004-01-27 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for assessing a procurement and accounts payable system |
US20040030421A1 (en) | 2000-05-24 | 2004-02-12 | Paul Haley | System for interprise knowledge management and automation |
US6694329B2 (en) | 1999-07-09 | 2004-02-17 | Streamline Systems Pty Ltd | Methods of organizing information |
US20040039629A1 (en) | 2002-05-23 | 2004-02-26 | Kevin Hoffman | Web based method and system for managing and transferring business information |
US6721713B1 (en) | 1999-05-27 | 2004-04-13 | Andersen Consulting Llp | Business alliance identification in a web architecture framework |
US6732028B2 (en) | 2001-02-15 | 2004-05-04 | Joe Auto, Inc. | Network based automotive service monitoring system |
US20040098154A1 (en) | 2000-10-04 | 2004-05-20 | Mccarthy Brendan | Method and apparatus for computer system engineering |
US20040111430A1 (en) | 2002-12-10 | 2004-06-10 | William Hertling | System and method for dynamic sequencing of a requirements-based workflow |
US20040143811A1 (en) | 2002-08-30 | 2004-07-22 | Elke Kaelicke | Development processes representation and management |
US20040148183A1 (en) | 2003-01-23 | 2004-07-29 | Electronic Data Systems Corporation | System and method for customizing infrastructure services for use in network services |
US20040162741A1 (en) | 2003-02-07 | 2004-08-19 | David Flaxer | Method and apparatus for product lifecycle management in a distributed environment enabled by dynamic business process composition and execution by rule inference |
US20040172445A1 (en) | 1999-07-01 | 2004-09-02 | Kaviraj Singh | Workflow as data-transition driven, scriptable state machines |
US6799145B2 (en) * | 2000-11-09 | 2004-09-28 | Ge Financial Assurance Holdings, Inc. | Process and system for quality assurance for software |
US20040215544A1 (en) | 2002-02-26 | 2004-10-28 | Vincent Formale | Method, system, and graphic user interface for automated asset management |
US6832202B1 (en) | 1997-08-29 | 2004-12-14 | Electronic Data Systems Corporation | Method and system of routing requests for authorized approval |
US20050004825A1 (en) | 2003-07-01 | 2005-01-06 | Stefan Ehrler | Managing resources for projects |
US20050027585A1 (en) | 2003-05-07 | 2005-02-03 | Sap Ag | End user oriented workflow approach including structured processing of ad hoc workflows with a collaborative process engine |
US20050027733A1 (en) | 2003-07-31 | 2005-02-03 | J. J. Donahue & Company | Creating and customizing a workflow process from a document |
US6865565B2 (en) | 2000-11-30 | 2005-03-08 | International Business Machines Corporation | Rule-based personalization framework for integrating recommendation systems |
US20050114829A1 (en) | 2003-10-30 | 2005-05-26 | Microsoft Corporation | Facilitating the process of designing and developing a project |
US6904593B1 (en) | 2000-03-24 | 2005-06-07 | Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. | Method of administering software components using asynchronous messaging in a multi-platform, multi-programming language environment |
US20050137920A1 (en) | 2003-12-22 | 2005-06-23 | Itm Software | Information technology enterprise manager and product portfolio manager application module |
US6961687B1 (en) | 1999-08-03 | 2005-11-01 | Lockheed Martin Corporation | Internet based product data management (PDM) system |
US6964044B1 (en) | 2000-10-06 | 2005-11-08 | Genworth Financial, Inc. | System and process for management of changes and modifications in a process |
US6973640B2 (en) * | 2000-10-04 | 2005-12-06 | Bea Systems, Inc. | System and method for computer code generation |
US6990437B1 (en) * | 1999-07-02 | 2006-01-24 | Abu El Ata Nabil A | Systems and method for determining performance metrics for constructing information systems |
US20060031078A1 (en) | 2004-08-04 | 2006-02-09 | Barbara Pizzinger | Method and system for electronically processing project requests |
US20060047555A1 (en) | 2004-08-27 | 2006-03-02 | Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd. | Method and system for re-authorizing workflow objects |
US20060059423A1 (en) | 2004-09-13 | 2006-03-16 | Stefan Lehmann | Apparatus, system, and method for creating customized workflow documentation |
US20060106627A1 (en) | 2004-11-17 | 2006-05-18 | Yaagoub Al-Nujaidi | Integrated idea management method and software with protection mechanism |
US7051036B2 (en) | 2001-12-03 | 2006-05-23 | Kraft Foods Holdings, Inc. | Computer-implemented system and method for project development |
US20060173908A1 (en) | 2005-01-10 | 2006-08-03 | Browning Michelle M | System and method for automated customization of a workflow management system |
US7092968B1 (en) * | 2002-12-06 | 2006-08-15 | Ncr Corporation | System and method for planning and implementing a data warehouse solution |
US7101031B2 (en) * | 2003-10-25 | 2006-09-05 | Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. | Property of air determination within image-forming device |
US20060235732A1 (en) | 2001-12-07 | 2006-10-19 | Accenture Global Services Gmbh | Accelerated process improvement framework |
US7139999B2 (en) * | 1999-08-31 | 2006-11-21 | Accenture Llp | Development architecture framework |
US7162427B1 (en) * | 1999-08-20 | 2007-01-09 | Electronic Data Systems Corporation | Structure and method of modeling integrated business and information technology frameworks and architecture in support of a business |
US7212987B2 (en) | 2001-10-23 | 2007-05-01 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for planning a design project, coordinating project resources and tools and monitoring project progress |
US7240325B2 (en) * | 2002-09-11 | 2007-07-03 | International Business Machines Corporation | Methods and apparatus for topology discovery and representation of distributed applications and services |
US20070179790A1 (en) | 2002-06-28 | 2007-08-02 | Matthew Leitch | Dynamic workflow approvals |
US7292990B2 (en) * | 2002-04-08 | 2007-11-06 | Topcoder, Inc. | System and method for software development |
US20070276674A1 (en) | 2002-08-19 | 2007-11-29 | Merzad Hemmat | Defining and sizing feasible approaches to business needs within an integrated development process |
US7321864B1 (en) | 1999-11-04 | 2008-01-22 | Jpmorgan Chase Bank, N.A. | System and method for providing funding approval associated with a project based on a document collection |
US7330822B1 (en) | 2001-05-29 | 2008-02-12 | Oracle International Corporation | Methods and systems for managing hierarchically organized and interdependent tasks and issues |
US7350185B2 (en) | 2003-09-03 | 2008-03-25 | Electronic Data Systems Corporation | System, method, and computer program product for effort estimation |
US7360201B2 (en) * | 2002-12-09 | 2008-04-15 | International Business Machines Corporation | Automated analysis and identification of options in project management |
US7389217B2 (en) * | 2001-06-07 | 2008-06-17 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for delivering a technical framework |
US7395540B2 (en) * | 2003-03-12 | 2008-07-01 | Microsoft Corporation | Automated business software application integration |
US7403948B2 (en) | 1998-08-24 | 2008-07-22 | Fujitsu Limited | Workflow system and method |
US7430498B2 (en) | 2004-09-07 | 2008-09-30 | The Boeing Company | System, method and computer program product for developing a system-of-systems architecture model |
US20080319816A1 (en) | 2001-06-07 | 2008-12-25 | International Business Machines Corporation | Enterprise service delivery technical architecture |
US7475107B2 (en) | 2002-07-08 | 2009-01-06 | Electronic Evidence Discovery, Inc. | System and method for managing distributed computer processes |
US7490319B2 (en) * | 2003-11-04 | 2009-02-10 | Kimberly-Clark Worldwide, Inc. | Testing tool comprising an automated multidimensional traceability matrix for implementing and validating complex software systems |
US7559049B1 (en) * | 2003-12-08 | 2009-07-07 | Sprint Communications Company L.P. | Integrated advance scheduling of indeterminate projects in an integrated development process |
US7631297B2 (en) * | 2005-04-05 | 2009-12-08 | International Business Machines Corporation | Autonomic computing: management agent utilizing action policy for operation |
US20090320088A1 (en) | 2005-05-23 | 2009-12-24 | Jasvir Singh Gill | Access enforcer |
US7640531B1 (en) * | 2004-06-14 | 2009-12-29 | Sprint Communications Company L.P. | Productivity measurement and management tool |
US7653592B1 (en) | 2003-12-01 | 2010-01-26 | Fannie Mae | System and method for processing a loan |
US7664664B2 (en) | 2003-04-23 | 2010-02-16 | Oracle International Corporation | Methods and systems for portfolio planning |
US7685604B2 (en) * | 2006-06-29 | 2010-03-23 | International Business Machines Corporation | Business process execution language (BPEL) application generator for legacy interfaces |
US7685013B2 (en) | 1999-11-04 | 2010-03-23 | Jpmorgan Chase Bank | System and method for automatic financial project management |
US7716073B1 (en) * | 2003-04-15 | 2010-05-11 | Pension Benefit Insurance Services, Inc. | Methods for administering claims in a pension insurance program |
-
2004
- 2004-05-27 US US10/857,287 patent/US7849438B1/en not_active Expired - Fee Related
Patent Citations (112)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US5557515A (en) | 1989-08-11 | 1996-09-17 | Hartford Fire Insurance Company, Inc. | Computerized system and method for work management |
US5208765A (en) | 1990-07-20 | 1993-05-04 | Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. | Computer-based method and system for product development |
US5999908A (en) | 1992-08-06 | 1999-12-07 | Abelow; Daniel H. | Customer-based product design module |
US5729746A (en) * | 1992-12-08 | 1998-03-17 | Leonard; Ricky Jack | Computerized interactive tool for developing a software product that provides convergent metrics for estimating the final size of the product throughout the development process using the life-cycle model |
US5548506A (en) | 1994-03-17 | 1996-08-20 | Srinivasan; Seshan R. | Automated, electronic network based, project management server system, for managing multiple work-groups |
US5974392A (en) | 1995-02-14 | 1999-10-26 | Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba | Work flow system for task allocation and reallocation |
US5815152A (en) | 1995-04-18 | 1998-09-29 | Logical Software Solutions Corporation | Method and apparatus for defining and evaluating a graphic rule |
US5692125A (en) | 1995-05-09 | 1997-11-25 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for scheduling linked events with fixed and dynamic conditions |
US5864480A (en) | 1995-08-17 | 1999-01-26 | Ncr Corporation | Computer-implemented electronic product development |
US6011917A (en) | 1995-08-23 | 2000-01-04 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and computer system for generating process management computer programs from process models |
US5765140A (en) | 1995-11-17 | 1998-06-09 | Mci Corporation | Dynamic project management system |
US5848393A (en) | 1995-12-15 | 1998-12-08 | Ncr Corporation | "What if . . . " function for simulating operations within a task workflow management system |
US5893074A (en) | 1996-01-29 | 1999-04-06 | California Institute Of Technology | Network based task management |
US5758328A (en) | 1996-02-22 | 1998-05-26 | Giovannoli; Joseph | Computerized quotation system and method |
US5960200A (en) * | 1996-05-03 | 1999-09-28 | I-Cube | System to transition an enterprise to a distributed infrastructure |
US5930798A (en) * | 1996-08-15 | 1999-07-27 | Predicate Logic, Inc. | Universal data measurement, analysis and control system |
US5949999A (en) * | 1996-11-25 | 1999-09-07 | Siemens Corporate Research, Inc. | Software testing and requirements tracking |
US5784539A (en) | 1996-11-26 | 1998-07-21 | Client-Server-Networking Solutions, Inc. | Quality driven expert system |
US20030023675A1 (en) | 1997-07-28 | 2003-01-30 | Ouchi Norman Ken | Workflow systems and methods for project management and information management |
US6832202B1 (en) | 1997-08-29 | 2004-12-14 | Electronic Data Systems Corporation | Method and system of routing requests for authorized approval |
US6289502B1 (en) | 1997-09-26 | 2001-09-11 | Massachusetts Institute Of Technology | Model-based software design and validation |
US6505176B2 (en) | 1998-06-12 | 2003-01-07 | First American Credit Management Solutions, Inc. | Workflow management system for an automated credit application system |
US7403948B2 (en) | 1998-08-24 | 2008-07-22 | Fujitsu Limited | Workflow system and method |
US6574605B1 (en) | 1998-11-17 | 2003-06-03 | Citibank, N.A. | Method and system for strategic services enterprise workload management |
US6424948B1 (en) | 1999-02-19 | 2002-07-23 | Guozhu Dong | Declarative workflow system supporting side-effects |
US20030145124A1 (en) | 1999-05-04 | 2003-07-31 | George V. Guyan | Method and article of manufacture for component based task handling during claim processing |
US6519571B1 (en) | 1999-05-27 | 2003-02-11 | Accenture Llp | Dynamic customer profile management |
US6721713B1 (en) | 1999-05-27 | 2004-04-13 | Andersen Consulting Llp | Business alliance identification in a web architecture framework |
US20040172445A1 (en) | 1999-07-01 | 2004-09-02 | Kaviraj Singh | Workflow as data-transition driven, scriptable state machines |
US6990437B1 (en) * | 1999-07-02 | 2006-01-24 | Abu El Ata Nabil A | Systems and method for determining performance metrics for constructing information systems |
US6694329B2 (en) | 1999-07-09 | 2004-02-17 | Streamline Systems Pty Ltd | Methods of organizing information |
US6961687B1 (en) | 1999-08-03 | 2005-11-01 | Lockheed Martin Corporation | Internet based product data management (PDM) system |
US7162427B1 (en) * | 1999-08-20 | 2007-01-09 | Electronic Data Systems Corporation | Structure and method of modeling integrated business and information technology frameworks and architecture in support of a business |
US6601234B1 (en) | 1999-08-31 | 2003-07-29 | Accenture Llp | Attribute dictionary in a business logic services environment |
US6324647B1 (en) | 1999-08-31 | 2001-11-27 | Michel K. Bowman-Amuah | System, method and article of manufacture for security management in a development architecture framework |
US7139999B2 (en) * | 1999-08-31 | 2006-11-21 | Accenture Llp | Development architecture framework |
US6662357B1 (en) * | 1999-08-31 | 2003-12-09 | Accenture Llp | Managing information in an integrated development architecture framework |
US6405364B1 (en) * | 1999-08-31 | 2002-06-11 | Accenture Llp | Building techniques in a development architecture framework |
US7321864B1 (en) | 1999-11-04 | 2008-01-22 | Jpmorgan Chase Bank, N.A. | System and method for providing funding approval associated with a project based on a document collection |
US7685013B2 (en) | 1999-11-04 | 2010-03-23 | Jpmorgan Chase Bank | System and method for automatic financial project management |
US6684191B1 (en) | 1999-11-22 | 2004-01-27 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for assessing a procurement and accounts payable system |
US6671818B1 (en) | 1999-11-22 | 2003-12-30 | Accenture Llp | Problem isolation through translating and filtering events into a standard object format in a network based supply chain |
US20020046394A1 (en) | 1999-12-06 | 2002-04-18 | Sung-Hee Do | Method and apparatus for producing software |
US6904593B1 (en) | 2000-03-24 | 2005-06-07 | Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. | Method of administering software components using asynchronous messaging in a multi-platform, multi-programming language environment |
US20020049816A1 (en) | 2000-03-24 | 2002-04-25 | Costin William Gilmore | System and method for raising funds and establishing user affinity over a distributed network |
US20040030421A1 (en) | 2000-05-24 | 2004-02-12 | Paul Haley | System for interprise knowledge management and automation |
US20030033191A1 (en) | 2000-06-15 | 2003-02-13 | Xis Incorporated | Method and apparatus for a product lifecycle management process |
US6636585B2 (en) | 2000-06-26 | 2003-10-21 | Bearingpoint, Inc. | Metrics-related testing of an operational support system (OSS) of an incumbent provider for compliance with a regulatory scheme |
US6658643B1 (en) * | 2000-08-23 | 2003-12-02 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and apparatus for computer software analysis |
US20020026630A1 (en) | 2000-08-28 | 2002-02-28 | John Schmidt | Enterprise application integration methodology |
US20020032596A1 (en) | 2000-09-12 | 2002-03-14 | International Business Machines Corporation | Workflow in a paperless office |
US7047518B2 (en) * | 2000-10-04 | 2006-05-16 | Bea Systems, Inc. | System for software application development and modeling |
US20040098154A1 (en) | 2000-10-04 | 2004-05-20 | Mccarthy Brendan | Method and apparatus for computer system engineering |
US6973640B2 (en) * | 2000-10-04 | 2005-12-06 | Bea Systems, Inc. | System and method for computer code generation |
US6964044B1 (en) | 2000-10-06 | 2005-11-08 | Genworth Financial, Inc. | System and process for management of changes and modifications in a process |
US20020042731A1 (en) | 2000-10-06 | 2002-04-11 | King Joseph A. | Method, system and tools for performing business-related planning |
US20020059512A1 (en) | 2000-10-16 | 2002-05-16 | Lisa Desjardins | Method and system for managing an information technology project |
US6799145B2 (en) * | 2000-11-09 | 2004-09-28 | Ge Financial Assurance Holdings, Inc. | Process and system for quality assurance for software |
US6865565B2 (en) | 2000-11-30 | 2005-03-08 | International Business Machines Corporation | Rule-based personalization framework for integrating recommendation systems |
US20020087381A1 (en) | 2000-12-29 | 2002-07-04 | Freeman Darlene M. | Project management for complex construction projects by monitoring subcontractors in real time |
US20020147801A1 (en) | 2001-01-29 | 2002-10-10 | Gullotta Tony J. | System and method for provisioning resources to users based on policies, roles, organizational information, and attributes |
US6732028B2 (en) | 2001-02-15 | 2004-05-04 | Joe Auto, Inc. | Network based automotive service monitoring system |
US7330822B1 (en) | 2001-05-29 | 2008-02-12 | Oracle International Corporation | Methods and systems for managing hierarchically organized and interdependent tasks and issues |
US7487079B2 (en) * | 2001-06-07 | 2009-02-03 | International Business Machines Corporation | Enterprise service delivery technical architecture |
US20080319816A1 (en) | 2001-06-07 | 2008-12-25 | International Business Machines Corporation | Enterprise service delivery technical architecture |
US7389217B2 (en) * | 2001-06-07 | 2008-06-17 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for delivering a technical framework |
US20030018952A1 (en) | 2001-07-13 | 2003-01-23 | Roetzheim William H. | System and method to estimate resource usage for a software development project |
US20030055811A1 (en) | 2001-09-20 | 2003-03-20 | Ricoh Company, Ltd. | Document controlled workflow systems and methods |
US20030061266A1 (en) | 2001-09-27 | 2003-03-27 | Norman Ken Ouchi | Project workflow system |
US7212987B2 (en) | 2001-10-23 | 2007-05-01 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for planning a design project, coordinating project resources and tools and monitoring project progress |
US7051036B2 (en) | 2001-12-03 | 2006-05-23 | Kraft Foods Holdings, Inc. | Computer-implemented system and method for project development |
US20030110067A1 (en) | 2001-12-07 | 2003-06-12 | Accenture Global Services Gmbh | Accelerated process improvement framework |
US20060235732A1 (en) | 2001-12-07 | 2006-10-19 | Accenture Global Services Gmbh | Accelerated process improvement framework |
US20040215544A1 (en) | 2002-02-26 | 2004-10-28 | Vincent Formale | Method, system, and graphic user interface for automated asset management |
US20030181991A1 (en) | 2002-03-08 | 2003-09-25 | Agile Software Corporation | System and method for managing and monitoring multiple workflows |
US20030171970A1 (en) | 2002-03-11 | 2003-09-11 | Robert Kinsella | Project scheduler interface |
US7292990B2 (en) * | 2002-04-08 | 2007-11-06 | Topcoder, Inc. | System and method for software development |
US20040039629A1 (en) | 2002-05-23 | 2004-02-26 | Kevin Hoffman | Web based method and system for managing and transferring business information |
US20040002883A1 (en) | 2002-06-27 | 2004-01-01 | Andrews Keith H. | Method for linking solution-specific method and process deliverables to business-based delivery framework |
US20070179790A1 (en) | 2002-06-28 | 2007-08-02 | Matthew Leitch | Dynamic workflow approvals |
US7475107B2 (en) | 2002-07-08 | 2009-01-06 | Electronic Evidence Discovery, Inc. | System and method for managing distributed computer processes |
US20070276674A1 (en) | 2002-08-19 | 2007-11-29 | Merzad Hemmat | Defining and sizing feasible approaches to business needs within an integrated development process |
US20040143811A1 (en) | 2002-08-30 | 2004-07-22 | Elke Kaelicke | Development processes representation and management |
US7240325B2 (en) * | 2002-09-11 | 2007-07-03 | International Business Machines Corporation | Methods and apparatus for topology discovery and representation of distributed applications and services |
US7092968B1 (en) * | 2002-12-06 | 2006-08-15 | Ncr Corporation | System and method for planning and implementing a data warehouse solution |
US7360201B2 (en) * | 2002-12-09 | 2008-04-15 | International Business Machines Corporation | Automated analysis and identification of options in project management |
US20040111430A1 (en) | 2002-12-10 | 2004-06-10 | William Hertling | System and method for dynamic sequencing of a requirements-based workflow |
US20040148183A1 (en) | 2003-01-23 | 2004-07-29 | Electronic Data Systems Corporation | System and method for customizing infrastructure services for use in network services |
US20040162741A1 (en) | 2003-02-07 | 2004-08-19 | David Flaxer | Method and apparatus for product lifecycle management in a distributed environment enabled by dynamic business process composition and execution by rule inference |
US7395540B2 (en) * | 2003-03-12 | 2008-07-01 | Microsoft Corporation | Automated business software application integration |
US7716073B1 (en) * | 2003-04-15 | 2010-05-11 | Pension Benefit Insurance Services, Inc. | Methods for administering claims in a pension insurance program |
US7664664B2 (en) | 2003-04-23 | 2010-02-16 | Oracle International Corporation | Methods and systems for portfolio planning |
US20050027585A1 (en) | 2003-05-07 | 2005-02-03 | Sap Ag | End user oriented workflow approach including structured processing of ad hoc workflows with a collaborative process engine |
US20050004825A1 (en) | 2003-07-01 | 2005-01-06 | Stefan Ehrler | Managing resources for projects |
US20050027733A1 (en) | 2003-07-31 | 2005-02-03 | J. J. Donahue & Company | Creating and customizing a workflow process from a document |
US7350185B2 (en) | 2003-09-03 | 2008-03-25 | Electronic Data Systems Corporation | System, method, and computer program product for effort estimation |
US7101031B2 (en) * | 2003-10-25 | 2006-09-05 | Hewlett-Packard Development Company, L.P. | Property of air determination within image-forming device |
US20050114829A1 (en) | 2003-10-30 | 2005-05-26 | Microsoft Corporation | Facilitating the process of designing and developing a project |
US7490319B2 (en) * | 2003-11-04 | 2009-02-10 | Kimberly-Clark Worldwide, Inc. | Testing tool comprising an automated multidimensional traceability matrix for implementing and validating complex software systems |
US7653592B1 (en) | 2003-12-01 | 2010-01-26 | Fannie Mae | System and method for processing a loan |
US7559049B1 (en) * | 2003-12-08 | 2009-07-07 | Sprint Communications Company L.P. | Integrated advance scheduling of indeterminate projects in an integrated development process |
US20050137920A1 (en) | 2003-12-22 | 2005-06-23 | Itm Software | Information technology enterprise manager and product portfolio manager application module |
US7640531B1 (en) * | 2004-06-14 | 2009-12-29 | Sprint Communications Company L.P. | Productivity measurement and management tool |
US20060031078A1 (en) | 2004-08-04 | 2006-02-09 | Barbara Pizzinger | Method and system for electronically processing project requests |
US20060047555A1 (en) | 2004-08-27 | 2006-03-02 | Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd. | Method and system for re-authorizing workflow objects |
US7430498B2 (en) | 2004-09-07 | 2008-09-30 | The Boeing Company | System, method and computer program product for developing a system-of-systems architecture model |
US20060059423A1 (en) | 2004-09-13 | 2006-03-16 | Stefan Lehmann | Apparatus, system, and method for creating customized workflow documentation |
US20060106627A1 (en) | 2004-11-17 | 2006-05-18 | Yaagoub Al-Nujaidi | Integrated idea management method and software with protection mechanism |
US20060173908A1 (en) | 2005-01-10 | 2006-08-03 | Browning Michelle M | System and method for automated customization of a workflow management system |
US7631297B2 (en) * | 2005-04-05 | 2009-12-08 | International Business Machines Corporation | Autonomic computing: management agent utilizing action policy for operation |
US20090320088A1 (en) | 2005-05-23 | 2009-12-24 | Jasvir Singh Gill | Access enforcer |
US7685604B2 (en) * | 2006-06-29 | 2010-03-23 | International Business Machines Corporation | Business process execution language (BPEL) application generator for legacy interfaces |
Non-Patent Citations (72)
Title |
---|
"Enterprise Resource Planning (EPR) Project," University of Florida, Jan. 2003, pp. 1-25, www.bridges.ufl.edu/ implementation/teams/processes/EPR-Project-Work-Policies-draft-v6.pdf . |
Advisory Action dated Dec. 27, 2007, 3 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/730,601, filed on Dec. 8, 2003. |
Advisory Action dated Jan. 26, 2009, 3 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,417, filed on Aug. 19, 2003. |
Advisory Action dated Jul. 7, 2009, 3 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,418. |
Advisory Action dated Mar. 12, 2010, 8 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,334, filed on Aug. 18, 2003. |
Advisory Action dated May 4, 2010, 3 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 11/120,224, filed on May 2, 2005. |
Advisory Action dated Nov. 13, 2007, 7 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,419, filed on Aug. 19, 2003. |
Advisory Action dated Nov. 17, 2009, 17 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 11/248,342, filed on Oct. 12, 2005. |
Arredondo, Barbara, et al., Patent Application entitled, "Small Enhancement Process Workflow Manager," filed Jul. 14, 2005, U.S. Appl. No. 11/181,154. |
Arredondo, Barbara, et al., Patent Application entitled, "System and Method for Managing Enterprise Services Projects," filed Oct. 12, 2005, U.S. Appl. No. 11/248,342. |
Babar et al, "An industrial case of exploiting product line architectures in agile software development", ACM SPLC, pp. 171-179, 2009. * |
Brandes, Tracy, et al., Patent Application entitled, "Change Request Processing in an Enterprise Development Proces," filed Aug. 19, 2003, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,418. |
Bray Curtis A., et al., Patent Application entitled, "Technology Assessment and Selection in Enterprise Development Process," filedAug. 26, 2005, U.S. Appl. No. 11/213,239. |
Department of Defense , Systems Management College, Systems Engineering Fundamentals, Jan. 2001, Defencse Acquisition University Press, pp. 1-222. |
Dossani et al, "The internet's role in offshored services: a case study of India", ACM Tras. on Internet Tech. vol. 7, no. 3, article 15, pp. 1-21, 2007. * |
Examiner's Answer dated Jun. 8, 2010, 21 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 11/248,342, filed on Oct. 12, 2005. |
Final Office Action dated Apr. 1, 2009, 14 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,418. |
Final Office Action dated Apr. 13, 2010, 49 pages,U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,418. |
Final Office Action dated Apr. 18, 2006, 16 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/429,615, filed on May 5, 2003. |
Final Office Action dated Aug. 1, 2007, 25 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,419, filed on Aug. 19, 2003. |
Final Office Action dated Dec. 22, 2009, 31 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,334, filed on Aug. 18, 2003. |
Final Office Action dated Feb. 24, 2010, 27 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 11/120,224, filed on May 2, 2005. |
Final Office Action dated Jun. 16, 2010, 58 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 11/038,598, filed on Jan. 19, 2005. |
Final Office Action dated Mar. 23, 2009, 19 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,334, filed on Aug. 18, 2003. |
Final Office Action dated Mar. 30, 2010, 48 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 11/226,121, filed on Sep. 14, 2005. |
Final Office Action dated May 25, 2010, 55 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 11/181,154. |
Final Office Action dated Oct. 17, 2008, 19 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,417, filed on Aug. 19, 2003. |
Final Office Action dated Oct. 26, 2009, 30 pages, U.S. Appl. 11/213,239 filed on Aug. 12, 2005. |
Final Office Action dated Oct. 28, 2008, 16 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/730,601, filed on Dec. 8, 2003. |
Final Office Action dated Sep. 10, 2007, 22 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/429,615, filed on May 5, 2003. |
Final Office Action dated Sep. 20, 2007, 15 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/730,601, filed on Dec. 8, 2003. |
Final Office Action dated Sep. 3, 2009, 19 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 11/248,342, filed on Oct. 12, 2005. |
Hemmat, et al., Provisional Patent Application entitled, "Enterprise Architecture Development Process," filed Aug. 19, 2002, U.S. Appl. No. 60/404,824. |
Hemmat, Merzad, Defining and Sizing Feasible Approaches to Business Needs Within an Integrated Development Process, Filing Date-May 05, 2003, U.S. Appl. No. 10/429,615, Specification (33 pgs.) and Drawings (3 sheets). |
Hemmat, Merzad, Defining and Sizing Feasible Approaches to Business Needs Within an Integrated Development Process, Filing Date—May 05, 2003, U.S. Appl. No. 10/429,615, Specification (33 pgs.) and Drawings (3 sheets). |
Hemmat, Merzad, et al., Patent Application entitled, "Integrated Advance Scheduling of Indeterminate Projects in an Integrated Development Process," filed Dec. 8, 2003, U.S. Appl. No. 10/730,601. |
Hemmat, Merzad, et al., Patent Application entitled, "Streamlined discover-Design Initiative," filed Jan. 19, 2005, U.S. Appl. No. 11/038,598. |
Hemmat, Merzad, Patent Application entitled, "Method for Discovering Functional and System Requirements in an Integrated Development Process," filed Aug. 18, 2003, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,334. |
Higgins, Gregory, et al., Patent Application entitled, "Multiple Conditional Pipeline Process Architecture," filed Sep. 14, 2005, U.S. Appl. No. 11/226,121. |
Hindman, Leslie Shannon et al., Patent Application entitled, "Tool and Method for Work Authorization in an Outsourced EDP Process," filed May 2, 2005, U.S. Appl. No. 11/120,224. |
Issa, Philip, et al., Patent Application entitled, "EDP Portal Cross-Process Integrated View," filed Aug. 19, 2003, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,417. |
Issa, Philip, et al., Patent Application entitled, "Integrated Software Implementation of Enterprise Development Process," filed Aug. 19, 2003, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,419. |
Notice of Abandonment dated Mar. 17, 2008, 2 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,419, filed on Aug. 19, 2003. |
Notice of Allowance dated Mar. 13, 2009, 12 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/730,601, filed on Dec. 8, 2003. |
Notice of Panel Decision dated Oct. 13, 2009 14 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/429,615, filed on May 5, 2003. |
Office Action (Restriction) dated Jul. 20, 2009, 6 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,334, filed on Aug. 18, 2003. |
Office Action (Restriction) dated Sep. 15, 2008, 7 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,334, filed on Aug. 18, 2003. |
Office Action dated Apr. 2, 2008, 17 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,417, filed on Aug. 19, 2003. |
Office Action dated Apr. 29, 2008, 18 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/730,601, filed on Dec. 8, 2003. |
Office Action dated Apr. 30, 2009, 21 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 11/213,239 filed on Aug. 12, 2005. |
Office Action dated Aug. 17, 2009, 26 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 11/120,224, filed on May 2, 2005. |
Office Action dated Aug. 18, 2008, 25 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 11/248,342, filed on Oct. 12, 2005. |
Office Action dated Aug. 3, 2009, 28 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 11/038,598, filed on Jan. 19, 2005. |
Office Action dated Aug. 4, 2009, 22 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 11/226,121, filed on Sep. 14, 2005. |
Office Action dated Dec. 1, 2005, 16 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/429,615, filed on May 5, 2003. |
Office Action dated Dec. 27, 2007, 14 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,334, filed on Aug. 18, 2003. |
Office Action dated Feb. 19, 2009, 22 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 11/248,342, filed on Oct. 12, 2005. |
Office Action dated Feb. 21, 2007, 22 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,419, filed on Aug. 19, 2003. |
Office Action dated Jan. 22, 2008, 9 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,417, filed on Aug. 19, 2003. |
Office Action dated Jan. 4, 2007, 14 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/429,615, filed on May 5, 2003. |
Office Action dated Jan. 7, 2010, 42 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,417, filed on Aug. 19, 2003. |
Office Action dated Jul. 1, 2010, 37 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 11/120,224, filed on May 2, 2005. |
Office Action dated Jun. 24, 2010, 45 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,417, filed on Aug. 19, 2003. |
Office Action dated Mar. 30, 2007, 16 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/730,601, filed on Dec. 8, 2003. |
Office Action dated May 27, 2009, 22 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,417, filed on Aug. 19, 2003. |
Office Action dated Oct. 27, 2009, 15 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,418. |
Office Action dated Oct. 29, 2009, 14 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 11/181,154. |
Office Action dated Sep. 23, 2008, 13 pages, U.S. Appl. No. 10/643,418. |
Pyron, Tim, "Sams Teach Yourself Microsoft® Project 2000 in 24 Hours," Safari Books Online, May 4, 2000, http://proquest.safaribooksonline.com/0-672-31814-8, 6 pages. |
Unphon, "Making use of rchitecture throughout the software life cycle- How the build hierarchy can facilitate product line development", IEEE Shark, pp. 41-48, 2009. * |
Upside Software, Inc., Using Upside Contract's workflow Engine to Improve Business Processes (Nov. 2004), pp. 1-2. Accessed from www.upsidesoft.com/upside+software/.../BP%20Workflow%20FINAL%20110404.pdf. |
Yalaho et al, "A conceptual process framework for IT supported international outsourcing of software production", IEEE BSN, pp. 1-10, 2005. * |
Cited By (71)
Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
---|---|---|---|---|
US7930201B1 (en) | 2002-08-19 | 2011-04-19 | Sprint Communications Company L.P. | EDP portal cross-process integrated view |
US8538767B1 (en) | 2002-08-19 | 2013-09-17 | Sprint Communications Company L.P. | Method for discovering functional and system requirements in an integrated development process |
US8386994B2 (en) * | 2003-11-04 | 2013-02-26 | Tata Consultancy Services Ltd. | Method of automation of business processes and apparatus therefor |
US20090319313A1 (en) * | 2003-11-04 | 2009-12-24 | Ghaisas Smita Subash | Method of automation of business processes and apparatus therefor |
US20060247959A1 (en) * | 2005-04-29 | 2006-11-02 | Tracy Oden | System and method for provisioning, fulfilling, and delivering full service information technology, management and other professional services and ancillary consulting support in real time via an integrated technology architecture while enabling end clients to procure, transact and receive these services and associated work products, on demand, in a just-in-time (JIT) fashion. |
US8849685B2 (en) * | 2005-04-29 | 2014-09-30 | Tracy Denise Oden | System for real-time on-demand provisioning, fulfilling, and delivering full service professional services |
US8484065B1 (en) | 2005-07-14 | 2013-07-09 | Sprint Communications Company L.P. | Small enhancement process workflow manager |
US8219967B2 (en) * | 2005-07-25 | 2012-07-10 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and apparatus for enabling enterprise project management with service oriented resource and using a process profiling framework |
US20120209779A1 (en) * | 2005-07-25 | 2012-08-16 | Liang-Jie Zhang | Method and apparatus for using service representations to align information technology with the strategy of an enterprise |
US20090254906A1 (en) * | 2005-07-25 | 2009-10-08 | Liang-Jie Zhang | Method and apparatus for enabling enterprise project management with service oriented resource and using a process profiling frameword |
US8589860B2 (en) * | 2005-07-25 | 2013-11-19 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and apparatus for using service representations to align information technology with the strategy of an enterprise |
US20100162200A1 (en) * | 2005-08-31 | 2010-06-24 | Jastec Co., Ltd. | Software development production management system, computer program, and recording medium |
US8418123B2 (en) * | 2005-08-31 | 2013-04-09 | Jastec Co., Ltd. | Software development production management system, computer program, and recording medium |
US20090240552A1 (en) * | 2006-04-21 | 2009-09-24 | Dmd Co., Ltd. | Network-based information technology solution development and management system and method |
US20100257012A1 (en) * | 2006-05-22 | 2010-10-07 | Simon Walker | Lead management system |
US8612283B1 (en) * | 2006-06-30 | 2013-12-17 | At&T Intellectual Property Ii, L.P. | Method and apparatus for evaluating the cost of operating a network infrastructure |
US9569737B2 (en) * | 2006-08-16 | 2017-02-14 | Aware Software, Inc. | Methods and tools for creating and evaluating system blueprints |
US20080046299A1 (en) * | 2006-08-16 | 2008-02-21 | Aware Software, Inc. | Methods and tools for creating and evaluating system blueprints |
US8898619B2 (en) * | 2007-04-13 | 2014-11-25 | International Business Machines Corporation | Software factory readiness review |
US20080255693A1 (en) * | 2007-04-13 | 2008-10-16 | Chaar Jarir K | Software Factory Readiness Review |
US20130014079A1 (en) * | 2007-04-13 | 2013-01-10 | International Business Machines Corporation | Software factory readiness review |
US8296719B2 (en) * | 2007-04-13 | 2012-10-23 | International Business Machines Corporation | Software factory readiness review |
US20090089121A1 (en) * | 2007-09-27 | 2009-04-02 | Siemens Aktiengesellschaft | Method and system for controlling a project |
US8572564B2 (en) * | 2007-10-12 | 2013-10-29 | The Pnc Financial Services Group, Inc. | Configuring and constructing applications in a mainframe-based computing environment |
US20090100344A1 (en) * | 2007-10-12 | 2009-04-16 | The Pnc Financial Services Group, Inc. | Mainframe-based browser |
US9116705B2 (en) * | 2007-10-12 | 2015-08-25 | The Pnc Financial Services Group, Inc. | Mainframe-based browser |
US20090100402A1 (en) * | 2007-10-12 | 2009-04-16 | The Pnc Financial Services Group, Inc. | Configuring and constructing applications in a mainframe-based computing environment |
US20090187880A1 (en) * | 2008-01-23 | 2009-07-23 | International Business Machines Corporation | Customized networked-based commerce system packages |
US8381171B2 (en) * | 2008-01-23 | 2013-02-19 | International Business Machines Corporation | Customized networked-based commerce system packages |
US20090265699A1 (en) * | 2008-04-18 | 2009-10-22 | Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (Publ) | Methods and systems for embedding upgrade steps for layered architectures |
US8595044B2 (en) * | 2008-05-29 | 2013-11-26 | International Business Machines Corporation | Determining competence levels of teams working within a software |
US20090300577A1 (en) * | 2008-05-29 | 2009-12-03 | International Business Machines Corporation | Determining competence levels of factory teams working within a software factory |
US8667469B2 (en) | 2008-05-29 | 2014-03-04 | International Business Machines Corporation | Staged automated validation of work packets inputs and deliverables in a software factory |
US20090319316A1 (en) * | 2008-06-19 | 2009-12-24 | Kurt Westerfeld | Method and System of Using Structured Social Networks and Communities to Create and Maintain Business Service Models |
US8527329B2 (en) | 2008-07-15 | 2013-09-03 | International Business Machines Corporation | Configuring design centers, assembly lines and job shops of a global delivery network into “on demand” factories |
US8671007B2 (en) | 2008-07-15 | 2014-03-11 | International Business Machines Corporation | Work packet enabled active project management schedule |
US20100023919A1 (en) * | 2008-07-23 | 2010-01-28 | International Business Machines Corporation | Application/service event root cause traceability causal and impact analyzer |
US8448129B2 (en) | 2008-07-31 | 2013-05-21 | International Business Machines Corporation | Work packet delegation in a software factory |
US8782598B2 (en) | 2008-07-31 | 2014-07-15 | International Business Machines Corporation | Supporting a work packet request with a specifically tailored IDE |
US8694969B2 (en) | 2008-07-31 | 2014-04-08 | International Business Machines Corporation | Analyzing factory processes in a software factory |
US20100063910A1 (en) * | 2008-09-05 | 2010-03-11 | Oracle International Corporation | Providing a unified view of contract revenue and invoice details |
US8666854B2 (en) * | 2008-09-05 | 2014-03-04 | Oracle International Corporation | Providing a unified view of contract revenue and invoice details |
US8595686B2 (en) * | 2008-11-26 | 2013-11-26 | Jastec Co., Ltd. | Software modification estimate method and software modification estimate system |
US20110289473A1 (en) * | 2008-11-26 | 2011-11-24 | Shigeru Koyama | Software modification estimate method and software modification estimate system |
US20110191748A1 (en) * | 2010-01-29 | 2011-08-04 | International Business Machines Corporation | Systems and methods for design time service verification and validation |
US20110296021A1 (en) * | 2010-05-28 | 2011-12-01 | International Business Machines Corporation | Enabling Service Virtualization in a Cloud |
US9063791B2 (en) | 2010-05-28 | 2015-06-23 | International Business Machines Corporation | Enabling service virtualization in a cloud |
US8661132B2 (en) * | 2010-05-28 | 2014-02-25 | International Business Machines Corporation | Enabling service virtualization in a cloud |
US8214240B1 (en) | 2011-01-28 | 2012-07-03 | Fmr Llc | Method and system for allocation of resources in a project portfolio |
US8660878B2 (en) | 2011-06-15 | 2014-02-25 | International Business Machines Corporation | Model-driven assignment of work to a software factory |
US9632494B2 (en) * | 2011-09-19 | 2017-04-25 | Schneider Electric Automation Gmbh | Method for generating and handling applications for components of a distributed control system and engineering system for implementing the process |
US20140228978A1 (en) * | 2011-09-19 | 2014-08-14 | Ralf Neubert | Method for generating and handling applications for components of a distributed control system and engineering system for implementing the process |
US20140082583A1 (en) * | 2012-09-14 | 2014-03-20 | Sap Ag | System and method for estimating scope and effort of software deployment |
US8806423B2 (en) * | 2012-09-14 | 2014-08-12 | Sap Ag | System and method for estimating scope and effort of software deployment |
US20140344210A1 (en) * | 2013-05-17 | 2014-11-20 | Oracle International Corporation | Use of projector and selector component types for etl map design |
US9507838B2 (en) * | 2013-05-17 | 2016-11-29 | Oracle International Corporation | Use of projector and selector component types for ETL map design |
US10216814B2 (en) | 2013-05-17 | 2019-02-26 | Oracle International Corporation | Supporting combination of flow based ETL and entity relationship based ETL |
US9921929B2 (en) | 2013-09-18 | 2018-03-20 | Bank Of America Corporation | Test case execution |
US9218261B2 (en) | 2013-09-18 | 2015-12-22 | Bank Of America Corporation | Test case execution |
US10824414B2 (en) | 2014-09-26 | 2020-11-03 | Oracle International Corporation | Drift management of images |
US10073690B2 (en) | 2014-09-26 | 2018-09-11 | Oracle International Corporation | Populating content for a base version of an image |
US10073693B2 (en) | 2014-09-26 | 2018-09-11 | Oracle International Corporation | Drift management of images |
US9256424B1 (en) * | 2014-09-26 | 2016-02-09 | Oracle International Corporation | Managing software configurations across different target software deployments |
US9383976B1 (en) * | 2015-01-15 | 2016-07-05 | Xerox Corporation | Methods and systems for crowdsourcing software development project |
US10387297B1 (en) * | 2016-06-15 | 2019-08-20 | Amdocs Development Limited | System, method, and computer program for end-to-end test management of a software testing project |
US10127141B2 (en) | 2017-02-20 | 2018-11-13 | Bank Of America Corporation | Electronic technology resource evaluation system |
US10868709B2 (en) | 2018-09-10 | 2020-12-15 | Oracle International Corporation | Determining the health of other nodes in a same cluster based on physical link information |
US11463303B2 (en) | 2018-09-10 | 2022-10-04 | Oracle International Corporation | Determining the health of other nodes in a same cluster based on physical link information |
US20200183820A1 (en) * | 2018-12-05 | 2020-06-11 | Sap Se | Non-regressive injection of deception decoys |
US10789159B2 (en) * | 2018-12-05 | 2020-09-29 | Sap Se | Non-regressive injection of deception decoys |
US11977858B2 (en) | 2022-02-07 | 2024-05-07 | T-Mobile Usa, Inc. | Centralized intake and capacity assessment platform for project processes, such as with product development in telecommunications |
Similar Documents
Publication | Publication Date | Title |
---|---|---|
US7849438B1 (en) | Enterprise software development process for outsourced developers | |
US8538767B1 (en) | Method for discovering functional and system requirements in an integrated development process | |
Felderer et al. | Integrating risk-based testing in industrial test processes | |
US8140367B2 (en) | Open marketplace for distributed service arbitrage with integrated risk management | |
US8527329B2 (en) | Configuring design centers, assembly lines and job shops of a global delivery network into “on demand” factories | |
US8452629B2 (en) | Work packet enabled active project schedule maintenance | |
US8448129B2 (en) | Work packet delegation in a software factory | |
US20090271760A1 (en) | Method for application development | |
Ng et al. | An ERP maintenance model | |
US20100023920A1 (en) | Intelligent job artifact set analyzer, optimizer and re-constructor | |
US20090006147A1 (en) | Method and system for defining and managing information technology projects based on conceptual models | |
Chao et al. | Artifact-based transformation of IBM global financing | |
US20140095623A1 (en) | System and method of a requirement, conpliance and resource management methodology | |
Chaudhary et al. | CMMI for development: Implementation guide | |
Larsson et al. | Revisiting the challenges in aligning RE and V&V: Experiences from the public sector | |
Zemont | Towards value-based requirements traceability | |
Khan et al. | CMMI Compliant Modernization Framework to Transform Legacy Systems. | |
Safa et al. | Front End Planning Tool (FEPT) based on an electronic process management | |
Parhizkar et al. | An AHP-Based analysis of the Cost of ERP Modification | |
Sadler | ER2C SDMLC: e nterprise r elease r isk-c entric s ystems d evelopment and m aintenance l ife c ycle | |
Atar | Hands-on test management with Jira: end-to-end test management with Zephyr, synapseRT, and Jenkins in Jira | |
Chernukha et al. | Methodology of implementation of modern information systems at commercial enterprises. | |
Golzarpoor | Industry foundation processes (IFP): theoretical and practical foundations for the construction industry | |
Kaikkonen | SaaS Application Integration Challenges | |
Thirunahari | A development framework for software integration projects–case study: Web app Integration with OpenWeather API |
Legal Events
Date | Code | Title | Description |
---|---|---|---|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY, L.P., KANSAS Free format text: ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNORS INTEREST;ASSIGNORS:HEMMAT, MERZAD;HINDMAN, L. SHANNON;KATHER, GEORGE R.;REEL/FRAME:015425/0731 Effective date: 20040525 |
|
REMI | Maintenance fee reminder mailed | ||
LAPS | Lapse for failure to pay maintenance fees | ||
STCH | Information on status: patent discontinuation |
Free format text: PATENT EXPIRED DUE TO NONPAYMENT OF MAINTENANCE FEES UNDER 37 CFR 1.362 |
|
FP | Lapsed due to failure to pay maintenance fee |
Effective date: 20141207 |
|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS, NEW YORK Free format text: GRANT OF FIRST PRIORITY AND JUNIOR PRIORITY SECURITY INTEREST IN PATENT RIGHTS;ASSIGNOR:SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY L.P.;REEL/FRAME:041895/0210 Effective date: 20170203 |
|
AS | Assignment |
Owner name: SPRINT COMMUNICATIONS COMPANY L.P., KANSAS Free format text: TERMINATION AND RELEASE OF FIRST PRIORITY AND JUNIOR PRIORITY SECURITY INTEREST IN PATENT RIGHTS;ASSIGNOR:DEUTSCHE BANK TRUST COMPANY AMERICAS;REEL/FRAME:052969/0475 Effective date: 20200401 |